Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Predicting juvenile recidivism: new method, old problems.

¹School of Social Work, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond 23284.

Adolescence

|January 1, 1987

Summary

This study evaluated statistical prediction methods for juvenile recidivism. No significant differences were found in the accuracy of logit analysis, predictive attribute analysis, or the Burgess procedure for predicting return to juvenile prison.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

A test of the validity of delinquency syndrome construct in a homogeneous sample.

Journal of adolescence·2000

Same author

Homelessness: consequence of a crisis or a long-term process?

Hospital & community psychiatry·1988

Same author

Comparison of rates of recidivism among status offenders and delinquents.

Adolescence·1987

See all related articles

Area of Science:

Criminology
Statistics
Sociology

Background:

Accurate prediction of juvenile recidivism is crucial for effective correctional interventions.
Evaluating statistical models aids in refining risk assessment tools for adolescent offenders.

Purpose of the Study:

To compare the predictive accuracy of three statistical procedures: logit analysis, predictive attribute analysis, and the Burgess procedure.
To assess these models using two distinct evaluation methods.

Main Methods:

The study employed logit analysis, predictive attribute analysis, and the Burgess procedure.
The criterion for prediction was the rate of return to a juvenile prison following the initial release.
Two separate assessment methodologies were utilized to evaluate model performance.

Main Results:

No statistically significant differences were observed in the predictive accuracy among the three tested statistical procedures.
The performance of logit analysis, predictive attribute analysis, and the Burgess procedure was comparable.

Conclusions:

The choice of statistical procedure among logit analysis, predictive attribute analysis, and the Burgess procedure does not significantly impact prediction accuracy for juvenile recidivism.
Further research may explore other factors influencing prediction accuracy or alternative methodologies.

Related Experiment Videos